You could at least answer the various questions being asked. But I guess ignoring others is also, sadly, the nature of lots of people on a forum.

I can respect opinions being posted, but when they're presented as facts you can expect being challenged.

Mds I cannot produce what you are asking in any other form , my initial post was and still is my OPINION of the Lewis /Vettel / Ferrari conundrum

I have no issue with my opinion being challenged in fact I enjoy the debate , You are asking me to produce links ( other people's opinion) to back up mine and as I am not a sheep I form my own opinions . The evidence of my opinion is my post .

If you are misreading people's opinions as facts , I can't help you with that other than to say that is a confusing and dangerous path .

The base line of my post was that the top drivers could all be seen as arrogant and presumtous so Luca was talking through his rear end especially as he has the King of those traits as his number one driver and for good reason .

I see Webber's comment as truthful and honest which Webber appears to be ( I stress in my opinion I do not know him personally )

In terms of Lewis I saw his posting of telemetry a knee jerk reaction to being mislead by the team about the rear wing when being asked to choose which one to use .

You saw it as being immodest ?

It's simply the different ways we as humans interpret what we see hear and do, that is what makes us interesting and sepaparates us from beasts.

The fact that you guys bandy about the words arrogant , aggressive and presumptuous etc whenever you speak of Lewis and then jump up in arms when similar traits are pointed out in other drivers speaks volumes

He wasn't mislead. The team didn't know which was quicker hence why they wanted to split the strategy. If they knew which one was quicker why wouldn't they put both cars on it?

Lewis didn't like the new wing so his side opted for the old one. His side thought the old one would be quicker and Lewis himself agreed. There was no misleading all the data was in front of him.

I do not profess to know Vettel on a personal level , knowing and being friends with someone is quite different to working with and competing against someone . I'm sure as a friend Vettel is as down to earth and friendly and funny as you say . I would never according to you argue with someone who personally knew him.

I as a fan of F1 find Vettel arrogant and presumptuous and if you really want the truth I am also uncomfortable with the ironic sarcasm he disguises as humour which he directs at others and never towards himself . ( just my take on him my opinion )

In terms of team player Webber would probably be best placed to answer that and I see neither warmth nor even a professional respect between the two of them , again just my observation. This takes nothing away from the fact as I said in my post that Vettel is a well informed , controlled robotic calculated driver and suits Ferrari perfectly in my opinion as Shumacher did.

His being down to earth and funny and getting on well with people who know him is what is irrelevant to this conversation

So when Lewis posted the telemetry, was he being modest?

Pride and arrogance are easily misread by observers. A case in point being Michael, who mostly everyone wrote off as an arrogant sort, but those who knew him said otherwise. He was a fiercely private person and still is.

About Webber, after qualifying for Austin GP Lewis approached Webbo and said,"you guys were fast"Webbo pointing him towards Vettel said:"he's the faster one."

I see Webber's comment as truthful and honest which Webber appears to be ( I stress in my opinion I do not know him personally )

In terms of Lewis I saw his posting of telemetry a knee jerk reaction to being mislead by the team about the rear wing when being asked to choose which one to use .

You saw it as being immodest ?

It's simply the different ways we as humans interpret what we see hear and do, that is what makes us interesting and sepaparates us from beasts.

The fact that you guys bandy about the words arrogant , aggressive and presumptuous etc whenever you speak of Lewis and then jump up in arms when similar traits are pointed out in other drivers speaks volumes

I don't know you personally, but my issue is with the fact that you were ignoring the deeds of someone you were building up, while deriding someone else for the same. Also the team didn't mislead him... they presented sets of data available and Lewis decided as he had dibs, so to speak.

I do not profess to know Vettel on a personal level , knowing and being friends with someone is quite different to working with and competing against someone . I'm sure as a friend Vettel is as down to earth and friendly and funny as you say . I would never according to you argue with someone who personally knew him.

I as a fan of F1 find Vettel arrogant and presumptuous and if you really want the truth I am also uncomfortable with the ironic sarcasm he disguises as humour which he directs at others and never towards himself . ( just my take on him my opinion )

In terms of team player Webber would probably be best placed to answer that and I see neither warmth nor even a professional respect between the two of them , again just my observation. This takes nothing away from the fact as I said in my post that Vettel is a well informed , controlled robotic calculated driver and suits Ferrari perfectly in my opinion as Shumacher did.

His being down to earth and funny and getting on well with people who know him is what is irrelevant to this conversation

So when Lewis posted the telemetry, was he being modest?

Pride and arrogance are easily misread by observers. A case in point being Michael, who mostly everyone wrote off as an arrogant sort, but those who knew him said otherwise. He was a fiercely private person and still is.

About Webber, after qualifying for Austin GP Lewis approached Webbo and said,"you guys were fast"Webbo pointing him towards Vettel said:"he's the faster one."

I see Webber's comment as truthful and honest which Webber appears to be ( I stress in my opinion I do not know him personally )

In terms of Lewis I saw his posting of telemetry a knee jerk reaction to being mislead by the team about the rear wing when being asked to choose which one to use .

You saw it as being immodest ?

It's simply the different ways we as humans interpret what we see hear and do, that is what makes us interesting and sepaparates us from beasts.

The fact that you guys bandy about the words arrogant , aggressive and presumptuous etc whenever you speak of Lewis and then jump up in arms when similar traits are pointed out in other drivers speaks volumes

I don't know you personally, but my issue is with the fact that you were ignoring the deeds of someone you were building up, while deriding someone else for the same. Also the team didn't mislead him... they presented sets of data available and Lewis decided as he had dibs, so to speak.

No not ignoring reacting and reading their "deeds" differently to you .

Lewis obviously felt differently about the way in which the team presented the data to him than you ! Hence his reaction ,my reaction and yours . You find his deed arrogant I find it petulant

I see Webber's comment as truthful and honest which Webber appears to be ( I stress in my opinion I do not know him personally )

In terms of Lewis I saw his posting of telemetry a knee jerk reaction to being mislead by the team about the rear wing when being asked to choose which one to use .

You saw it as being immodest ?

It's simply the different ways we as humans interpret what we see hear and do, that is what makes us interesting and sepaparates us from beasts.

The fact that you guys bandy about the words arrogant , aggressive and presumptuous etc whenever you speak of Lewis and then jump up in arms when similar traits are pointed out in other drivers speaks volumes

He wasn't mislead. The team didn't know which was quicker hence why they wanted to split the strategy. If they knew which one was quicker why wouldn't they put both cars on it?

Lewis didn't like the new wing so his side opted for the old one. His side thought the old one would be quicker and Lewis himself agreed. There was no misleading all the data was in front of him.

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

It's dragged on because you keep resurrecting it to support your claims

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

Do you not think he would question why they would purposefully put a slower wing on the other car if they definitively knew one was quicker?

McLaren: Right Lewis we want you to take the high Downforce wing and JB the low one. Now don't worry yours is the quickest.

Lewis: Aye okay but if ones quicker why not put both cars on it.

McLaren: Just trollin' JB.

Lewis: Ha Ha sweet.

I get labelled a Lewis Basher on here And I wouldn't even go as far as saying he's daft enough not to question it if Macca said one route was definitely the quicker route but weren't putting it on both cars.

Anyway here's what Paddy Lowe said.

Quote:

"We will be looking at the differences and why we couldn't get the same performance, which ought to have been there on paper. The lap time is not explained by the differences in set-up.

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

It's dragged on because you keep resurrecting it to support your claims

It was a mistake of epic proportions and one which most of the people think was quite daft and even many hardcore Lewis fans wouldn't defend it... of course when someone like yourself suggests he's fault free we go back to this, 2011, lie-gate or the "wooden-eye" syndrome amongst others...

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

It's dragged on because you keep resurrecting it to support your claims

It was a mistake of epic proportions and one which most of the people think was quite daft and even many hardcore Lewis fans wouldn't defend it... of course when someone like yourself suggests he's fault free we go back to this, 2011, lie-gate or the "wooden-eye" syndrome amongst others...

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

It's dragged on because you keep resurrecting it to support your claims

It was a mistake of epic proportions and one which most of the people think was quite daft and even many hardcore Lewis fans wouldn't defend it... of course when someone like yourself suggests he's fault free we go back to this, 2011, lie-gate or the "wooden-eye" syndrome amongst others...

Fact is no human is fault free I accept when the drivers make mistakes pass comment and move on where's as you seem so focused on finding fault with Lewis and rehashing what you perceive as his mistakes that no matter what the topic is about we have to suffer your lie gate , tweeting and 2011 fouling up the threads like stale sweat and turning each thread into a Lewis Hamilton isn't god bash fest

I didn't see any evidence that Lewis felt misled. More like "damn, we made the wrong choice, here look" and "I'm showing you because I want you to know my car was not up to the job, I wasn't just slow".

No point with wasting time on this one... He/ she clearly doesn't reason for whatever it may be (including a healthy dose of bias), or why would it be dragged for 3-4 months?

It's dragged on because you keep resurrecting it to support your claims

It was a mistake of epic proportions and one which most of the people think was quite daft and even many hardcore Lewis fans wouldn't defend it... of course when someone like yourself suggests he's fault free we go back to this, 2011, lie-gate or the "wooden-eye" syndrome amongst others...

Fact is no human is fault free I accept when the drivers make mistakes pass comment and move on where's as you seem so focused on finding fault with Lewis and rehashing what you perceive as his mistakes that no matter what the topic is about we have to suffer your lie gate , tweeting and 2011 fouling up the threads like stale sweat and turning each thread into a Lewis Hamilton isn't god bash fest

It is quite funny how you want to forget anything negative about this lad, but were harping on negatives of the other one in a blue+red dress. Also, it is not at all about dwelling on flaws of one man (as you said now, who doesn't and i've got a fair share of my own ), but just that i was trying to provide a balanced view here.

It is quite funny how you want to forget anything negative about this lad, but were harping on negatives of the other one in a blue+red dress. Also, it is not at all about dwelling on flaws of one man (as you said now, who doesn't and i've got a fair share of my own ), but just that i was trying to provide a balanced view here.

............................

spot on, they like to keep pointing out faults in vettel and alonso but get so defensive or get selective memory when it comes to hamilton. fact is we have never nor will we ever see alonso or vettel perform as bad as hamilton did in 2011

Come on guys, be reasonable. Unless anyone has a crystal ball nobody can say with any certainty that Vettel, Alonso, or anyone else won't have a scrappy year in future, so please stick to what is known and can actually be debated.

_________________

AlienTurnedHuman wrote:

Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

It is quite funny how you want to forget anything negative about this lad, but were harping on negatives of the other one in a blue+red dress. Also, it is not at all about dwelling on flaws of one man (as you said now, who doesn't and i've got a fair share of my own ), but just that i was trying to provide a balanced view here.

............................

spot on, they like to keep pointing out faults in vettel and alonso but get so defensive or get selective memory when it comes to hamilton. fact is we have never nor will we ever see alonso or vettel perform as bad as hamilton did in 2011

Isn't judging Hamtilon solely on 2011 not an act of selective memory in itself?

I agree. Outright speed isn't everything, it's how you use it. I personally think Vettel utilises his talents better than Hamilton. That's why one has a single World Title and the other three.

That's BULL!, and you know that. Did not Vettel cracked under pressure in Canada 2011 ?, and why Lewis still has One WDC, what for silly statement is that ?. Lewis has been let down in China 2007 and could easy won the WDC in 2010 had the car not broke down that often and do we need to talk about 2012 right ?, your whole comment is absolute BULL stop the nonsense. Lewis is heads and shoulders above Lucky Vettel and Alonso

Vettel has made the most of any opportunity that has come his way. I would say that is the quality he possesses which Hamilton lacks, the ability to make the most of a situation. You could argue Hamilton has been let down by the team in 2007 and 2012, but he has been very known to make more mistakes than Seb, so yes you could argue that Vettel is better than Hamilton.

I personally think Hamilton has more raw ability in terms of pace and racecraft, and dislike Vettel. But Vettel is calculating and more measured in his approach, and it works perfectly.

Oh, and to lower my tone to something more akin to what everyone else will likely post... "Vettel's only better because he's got the best car. LULZ"

Nonsense mate, when Vettel drives in the pack he can do nothing but i agree when he starts from pole he has to do nothing and wins the easy fashion a d has a team that does anything for him

That's your opinion. I have mine. It takes a great driver and a great car to get pole and lead from the front. If it were easy, Webber would have done it. But as I said that's my opinion, I'll let you carry on with your own opinion my friend.

These are facts what i stated so don't give me that my opinion/your opinion mate

Better question, do you think Alonso will last 4 or 5 more years without a title in 2013? I can see equal chances of him wanting to leave, and Ferrari booting him.

I don't see Ferrari booting him. He hasn't delivered a title for his first 3 years at Ferrari but no one of sound mind has ever suggested that this is down to Alonso's lack of ability. Ferrari know that they have the world's top driver at the moment and they also know that the lack of titles is primarily down to them failing to provide a fast enough car.

There is a possibility of him choosing to leave, but where to? I guess we don't know if the same teams will be at the front in 4-5 years time, but we can say that McLaren is a definite no-no after the 2007 episode and if Merc are a front-running team by that time then they will most likely be Hamilton's team and won't want to risk a repeat of 2007 by pairing Alonso with him again. RBR is only really an option if Vettel goes the other way. And lets not forget that by that time Alonso will be in his mid-thirties and would therefore not be an attractive long-term proposition.

I think Alonso could have won this year if he had been a tougher competitor, and driven on the edge more. His conservatism cost him. Playing it safe isn't enough.

And staying with a team that he can't win a title with is no better than moving to another that's not winning. If he's the man everyone says he is, no reason why he can't move to Lotus or Sauber or Force India or Lotus and win. A bigger concern for me would be leaving his systems engineer at Ferrari, because without those hooked up starts he wouldn't even have been in the hunt this year.

Thanks for saving me the trouble of making a "Hammy is overrated" thread that I've wanted to do for months

On a separate note but relating to the comments just before this - When you talk about teams beating themselves you have to consider the opponents' errors too. Red Bull made some big mistakes - the alternators, the fuel issue, not telling seb to let JB back thru in Hockenheim, plus all the errors made by the drivers, and for Mark that was a big # toward the end. Ferrari had a handful of poor-ish strategy calls, and a #2 who only produced points for part of the season. McLaren had some bad pit stops, a fueling mistake, some reliability failures, and a #2 who only produced points for part of the season.

RBR still clobbered both of these teams in the constructors - so even with mistakes they were strong enough to beat a near-perfect Ferrari team, and a McLaren team with the same TEAM struggles they had, but one "worse" driver for part of the season.

Then look at Lewis and Fernando vs. Sebastian. Just about everyone has said Lewis and Fernando drove flawlessly, and we've seen some clumsiness and outright mistakes from Sebastian. That means Lewis and Fernando at their best aren't enough to beat Sebastian at less than his best, because they can't make their teams do what Red Bull can. /soapbox

Regarding Pacific Beach's comment, Button is a championship racer and Hamilton and Button are ALLOWED to race together, whilst Vettel and Alonso are number 1 drivers in their team, so looking at this, Hamilton and Button would both finish quite close to each other.

Then lets see if hamilton can become a number 1 driver in 2013.

You make it sound like Mark and Massa's role since beginning of the season is to make sure their teammates finish higher than them

Team orders ( if you wanna call it that ) in 2012 by Red Bull and Ferrari was used only late in the season, when the number #2 driver had no realistic chance of taking the title.

Regarding Pacific Beach's comment, Button is a championship racer and Hamilton and Button are ALLOWED to race together, whilst Vettel and Alonso are number 1 drivers in their team, so looking at this, Hamilton and Button would both finish quite close to each other.

Then lets see if hamilton can become a number 1 driver in 2013.

You make it sound like Mark and Massa's role since beginning of the season is to make sure their teammates finish higher than them

Team orders ( if you wanna call it that ) in 2012 by Red Bull and Ferrari was used only late in the season, when the number #2 driver had no realistic chance of taking the title.

Massa's certainly was!

_________________"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea."

The sooner, the better! Hopefully, Spa, Monza, Silverstone etc then would be able to negotiate a better and permanent sort of deal... it would be really nice to see some proper tracks every year on the calendar, and not alternatively as Bernie would force them to.

I agree. Outright speed isn't everything, it's how you use it. I personally think Vettel utilises his talents better than Hamilton. That's why one has a single World Title and the other three.

That's BULL!, and you know that. Did not Vettel cracked under pressure in Canada 2011 ?, and why Lewis still has One WDC, what for silly statement is that ?. Lewis has been let down in China 2007 and could easy won the WDC in 2010 had the car not broke down that often and do we need to talk about 2012 right ?, your whole comment is absolute BULL stop the nonsense. Lewis is heads and shoulders above Lucky Vettel and Alonso

I thought China 2007 was driver error... someone explain?

I was. Hamilton was on finished tyres, gave it a bit too much coming into the pit lane, slid wide into the only gravel trap on the track. If he'd been a bit more cautious coming into the pits he'd have won the WDC.

McLaren should have brought him in sooner yes, but the error was Hamilton's and he could have asked for new tyres earlier himself too.

Isn't judging Hamtilon solely on 2011 not an act of selective memory in itself?

tbf hamilton has always been a bit reckless. 2012 was his least reckless year sure but it wasnt just 2011, for on and off track issues

OK lets look at Hamilton's and Vettel's retirements over the years due to crashes/collisions other than 2011, disregarding whose fault it was. I've added other incidents I can remember but frankly I don't have a photographic memory so I'm sure I've missed some.

2007Hamilton: China (slid off on worn tyres)Vettel: Belgium (can't remember this one but Wiki says that he retired due to damage "probably caused by a collision"), Japan (crashed into Webber behind the safety car)

2008Hamilton: Canada (embarrassing pit lane collision). Also ran into the back of Alonso in Bahrain and lost front wingVettel: Australia (1st corner coliision), Bahrain (collision on first lap), Spain (collision on first lap), Silverstone (collision on first lap)

2009Hamilton: Belgium (first lap incident with Grosjean and Button), Monza (crashed in the closing stages trying to chase down Button)Vettel: Australia (crashed in the closing stages after an over-ambitious passing attempt on Kubica), Malaysia (spun off in undriveable monsoon rain), Monaco (binned it in the wall at St Devote),

2010:Hamilton: Monza (collision with Massa being too ambitious at the start), Singapore (collision with Webber)Vettel: Turkey (collided with Webber). Also collided with Webber on the first lap at Silverstone and wiped Button out in Belgium

2012:Hamilton: Valencia (collision with Maldonado), Brazil (collected by an out-of-control Hulkenberg)Vettel: No retirements, but collided with Karthikeyan in Malaysia and with Senna in Brazil.

So other than 2011 Hamilton has been no more incident-prone than Vettel has. If I could be bothered I could collate the same stats for Alonso over the same period and I've no doubt it would show a similar number of incidents.

My intention is not to belittle Vettel's achievements here. He's a fantastic racing driver and a worthy champion. However he is not in a class of his own.

Isn't judging Hamtilon solely on 2011 not an act of selective memory in itself?

tbf hamilton has always been a bit reckless. 2012 was his least reckless year sure but it wasnt just 2011, for on and off track issues

OK lets look at Hamilton's and Vettel's retirements over the years due to crashes/collisions other than 2011, disregarding whose fault it was. I've added other incidents I can remember but frankly I don't have a photographic memory so I'm sure I've missed some.

2007Hamilton: China (slid off on worn tyres)Vettel: Belgium (can't remember this one but Wiki says that he retired due to damage "probably caused by a collision"), Japan (crashed into Webber behind the safety car)

2008Hamilton: Canada (embarrassing pit lane collision). Also ran into the back of Alonso in Bahrain and lost front wingVettel: Australia (1st corner coliision), Bahrain (collision on first lap), Spain (collision on first lap), Silverstone (collision on first lap)

2009Hamilton: Belgium (first lap incident with Grosjean and Button), Monza (crashed in the closing stages trying to chase down Button)Vettel: Australia (crashed in the closing stages after an over-ambitious passing attempt on Kubica), Malaysia (spun off in undriveable monsoon rain), Monaco (binned it in the wall at St Devote),

2010:Hamilton: Monza (collision with Massa being too ambitious at the start), Singapore (collision with Webber)Vettel: Turkey (collided with Webber). Also collided with Webber on the first lap at Silverstone and wiped Button out in Belgium

2012:Hamilton: Valencia (collision with Maldonado), Brazil (collected by an out-of-control Hulkenberg)Vettel: No retirements, but collided with Karthikeyan in Malaysia and with Senna in Brazil.

So other than 2011 Hamilton has been no more incident-prone than Vettel has. If I could be bothered I could collate the same stats for Alonso over the same period and I've no doubt it would show a similar number of incidents.

My intention is not to belittle Vettel's achievements here. He's a fantastic racing driver and a worthy champion. However he is not in a class of his own.

If it wasn't for those pesky facts I would have got away with it...

_________________"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea."